COMPREHENSIBLE INPUT (PICTURES, KNOWLEDGE OF THE WORLD, REALIA) context

ADQUISITION VS LEARNING

Focused mode vs difuse mode

Index,

icon

symbol
Understanding language without ability to speak
In 1962 Eric Lenneberg published an interesting case report of an 8 year old boy who had a
congenital disorder that prevented him from developing the ability to speak. He could perform many
oro-facial behaviors like chewing, swallowing, blowing, licking and he spontaneously made noises
"that sound somewhat like Swiss yodeling" but he could not speak. With intensive speech therapy
he eventually achieved the ability to "repeat a few words after his speech therapist or his mother but
the words are still barely intelligible" (p. 420). In contrast, his speech comprehension had been
judged as fully normal by the author as well as by neurologists and speech pathologists over the
course of 20 or so visits. Lenneberg goes on to report a more systematic examination of the boy's
comprehension which revealed it to be well preserved.

Lenneberg couched his case report, which he indicated is typical of a larger category of patients, in
the context of theories of speech development which held that babbling and speech output was
critical to the normal development language abilities including receptive (comprehension) skills. He
argued that this type of case argues against the view that speech production is critical to the
development of receptive speech.

Today, Lenneberg might have highlighted the relevance of his case for mirror neuron/motor theories
of speech perception. These theories claim that speech is perceived by mapping acoustic speech
sounds onto motor representations coding the production of speech. For example, Rizzolatti and
Arbib (1998) stated,

mirror neurons represent the link between sender and receiver that Liberman postulated in his
motor theory of speech perception as the necessary prerequisite for any type of communication (p.
189)

Such a theory would seem to predict that if an individual failed to develop motor systems underlying
speech production they should not be able to perceive and comprehend speech. Lenneberg's report
demonstrates that this prediction is incorrect.

Are there more recent cases of the development of normal language comprehension in the face of
failures to develop speech production. Yes, here is a case I recently came across (Case 1 from
Christen et al. 2000).

A three month old girl had an acute febrile illness (possibly meningitis) with epileptic seizures. After
recovery from the acute illness, her motor development was delayed, she exhibited constant
drooling, took only pureed food, and never acquired expressive language. She attended a school
for disabled children, but made normal progress in writing and reading. She was examined at 15
years old by the paper authors. The patient presented with pseudobulbar palsy (difficulty with
orofacial movements such as chewing, swallowing, speech), her “mental state” was normal but she
could communicate only by non-verbal means as she was unable to produce identifiable speech
sounds. However her language comprehension was reported as normal. An MRI showed bilateral
lesions of the anterior opercular region which the authors believed were acquired at age three
months during the child's illness and which damaged speech output systems. Bilateral lesions in
this region in adults produce a similar disruption of speech output, without affecting comprehension
abilities, so called Foix-Chavany-Marie syndrome.

Again, we have a clear demonstration of preserved receptive speech abilities despite a complete
lack of development of motor speech capacity. This kind of result is not straightforwardly explained
by theories which hold that speech production is critical for speech perception
1.- When you start with a new language, it is necessary to listen OFTEN and REPEATEDLY to
short stories. This repetition will lead you to get a sense of the language. The rhythm, the
musicality, the sounds, the pauses...

2.- This first stage of language acquisition (the one mentioned above) can take 3 months or
more depending on how difficult the language is for you. For example, Steve says that he went
through this stage really quickly with his Persian but it took him a lot with his Arabic.

3.- The MOST IMPORTANT thing when you start in a language is INPUT. If you can
understand the language, if you have a high level of comprehension, if you have sufficent
vocabulary, the OUTPUT will come. So focus on INPUT.

4.- This INPUT doesn't have to be too difficult. Look for material that makes you feel
comfortable with the language. Nonfiction books, History books, Geography books... Search
for INPUT that makes you feel you can understand the language and motivates you to go on
with the learning.

5.- Getting into the grammar rules right away is not efficient. It is better to experiment with the
language and get curious about how things work. If you read grammar rules about things you
have no experience about, you won't learn anything. Dive into the language and look for the
grammar rules as they get into your way.